By RAELYNN RICARTE
News staff writer
October 8, 2007

Hood River County’s administrative employees staged two informational pickets this week to gain public support for their cause.

Union workers waved green signs bearing slogans such as “Let’s talk about fair health care.” They spent their lunch hour outside the State Street library on Wednesday. And stood on Thursday in front of the health department on June Street.

The 52 members of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Council 75, Local 1082, want an immediate renegotiation of health care coverage.

Local 1082 plans to strike in November if the county refuses to change the contested language. The disputed contract requires part-time single workers to pay $196 per month toward their health care premiums.

“We’re open to discussion. We want to get back to the table and handle this,” said Hoby Hansen, president of Local 1082.

By a 90 percent margin, workers rejected the contract negotiated between labor and management over a seven-month period. The terms of the agreement had been hammered out under the watchful eye of a state mediator. But Local 1082 members felt the final product created an inequity.

Union officials and the county’s labor attorney are in disagreement about how the disputed provision ended up in the contract.

Steve Marrs, union representative, said a “misunderstanding” led to a contract requirement that part-time singles foot the bill for half of their health care coverage. He said the union asked that all employees continue to have 100 percent of their premiums paid by the county. He said the union proposed that part-time staffers pay 50 percent of the cost to a spouse and/or child.

Marrs said the language submitted in the final contract did not reflect that proposal. The union bargaining team agreed to run the issue by its members — and received a solid “no” vote.

Local 1082 workers approved of the 3 percent raise and other terms of the contract. So Marrs believes it should not be difficult to reach a new agreement.

“This was just an honest misunderstanding and we need to go back to the mediation process and figure it out,” said Don Loving, public affairs director for AFSCME.

Bruce Bischof, the county’s attorney, disagrees with that assessment. He said the intent of the union proposal was to reduce costs so full-time workers did not have to start paying some of their coverage costs.

“There was never any misunderstanding. We adopted their (union) proposal exactly as it was submitted. The issue was then clarified three times; by the mediator, Denise Ford (county’s Human Resources director) and myself,” he said. Ford deferred comment to Bishof.

Marrs said having all Local 1082 employees covered equally will cost the county an additional $72,000 over the three-year life of the contract.

He said the local government can afford the extra capital since it has several million banked in reserve funds.

Bischof said the county’s budget grows tighter every year. He said the reserve funds are intended to be used for emergencies or to maintain essential services in an economic downturn.

“We pay $11,000 per month to provide health care to all our full-time employees without any contribution on their part. It is growing increasingly difficult to provide benefits at that level when costs across-the-board are going up,” said Bischof.

He said Local 1082 does not need to apply pressure for a new bargaining session. He said, by law, a strike cannot take place until both sides have spent 15 days in mediation. He said a 30-day cooling off period also has to pass, which provides even more time to resolve the disagreement.

“We’ll all go back to the table as soon as the mediator sets a date,” said Bischof.

Loving said the county has inserted the same contested health care language into another union contract. He said Local 2503, representing more than 30 public works employees, wants the provision removed.

“The two contracts are obviously closely tied; but, by the same token, they are separate negotiations and the county can’t just decide to put new language into that proposal away from the bargaining table,” said Loving.